Re: Blueberry is not "closed" (was: Closing Blueberry)

[John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>]

Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:

> To be sure this is clear, the intent is for a change 
> that includes only the Blueberry requirements and 
> would not open up a major version (eg, 1.1) change?


Yes.

 
> So the notion that other fixes could be included 
> (eg, tighter coupling to the namespace requirement) 
> would not be part of this effort?


Yes.

> Yes to both of 
> those questions with some assurance that this will 
> not change opportunistically would add to the comfort 
> level.


That is the whole point of the final Blueberry requirement.

-- 
There is / one art             || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
no more / no less              || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things             || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness           \\ -- Piet Hein